Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Prophet who wrote (42420)	5/17/2000 9:20:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Prophet, Nevertheless, if you really meant what you posted, posting Semico numbers - our good friend Sherry Garber - after her estimates have long since been exceeded even this year, is not the best approach. I don't know what history this person (Sherry Gerber) has. The estimate was for 2004, not for 2000. Your assumption of $500+ valuation was for 3+ years out - the timeframe she addressed. What matters is when INTC has enough .13 plants to flood the market and lower the CPU cost, given that INTC has five times as many plants as AMD. Actually, you may be missing the point. It depends on quality, not the quantity of the chips produced. An example of the breakdown may be: +The top performing CPU may cost $1,000 or more +10% slower $500 +another 10% slower: $100 +another 10% slower: $50 The flooding of market theory (as it worked in the past) depends on AMD not having any parts in first 2 categories and Intel having majority of their parts in the first 2 categories. given that INTC has five times as many plants as AMD. How many plants does Intel have? How many are making CPUs? Did you include FASL (making flash) in your comparison? Joe